The Liberals groaned, then moaned as the government sent up Pierre Poilievre to answer. At the sight of the Prime Minister’s parliamentary secretary, Ignatieff decided the proceedings moot, packed up his papers and left the House, the Conservatives calling after him to stay.
“Words, Mr. Speaker,” Poilievre began. “As an academic, a journalist and author, the Liberal leader has built his entire career on words. Surely, he cannot tell us that his words mean nothing. If his words mean nothing, then he means nothing.”
Poilievre invited Ignatieff to return and answer whatever it was he was asking, then returned to his seat and shared a laugh with Tom Lukiwski. Watson smiled too. Chuck Strahl laughed uproariously. John Baird applauded.
The people of Nepean Carleton must be proud.
12 comments:
Tom Lukiwski - this guy's on the political news panels a lot lately. Does that mean they think it's enough time for people to have forgotten his apology and "promise" to work with the gay and lesbian community - and, has he worked with them, like he promised?
You know, I think the speaker is slipping again. He lets far too much go by.
Does Poilievre have a speech impediment, or is the exaggerated, talking down, stretched out words deliberate? If it's an impediment, then can't criticize him, but if it's deliberate - why the hell do people let themselves be talked down too by this kid?
"has he worked with them, like he promised?"
From what I've read he's done nothing, including turning down invitations.
Poilievre has no speech impediment. It's all an exagerated cadence that he apparently believes is poignant.
It's not, it's pathetic.
I can't think of a more fitting put down to this little weasel than walking out on him.
btw, it's against the rules to indicate a members absence in the House. I wonder why he wasn't called on it.
Too bad all the BLOC, NDP and Liberals don't work together - walk out when the CPC's get so stupid. Tell the speaker they'll come back when the Cons start to act like adults and deal with the "serious" issues of today.
In the Members Statements - they attacked all opposition parties yesterday.
Campaigning on our money, again.
No we aren't proud. A lot of us are rather disgusted.
And yeah, he is the master of speech manipulation. Don't believe a thing that weasel says.
"A lot of us are rather disgusted."
Unbelievably a lot more of you are not.
Just occurred to me - isn't it against parliamentary rule to point out who's in the House? Didn't Poilievre point out that Ignatieff left? What the hell is wrong with the Speaker - is he afraid the Cons won't vote him in again?
Based on the following exchange, I would have left as well:
Mr. Jeff Watson (Essex, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, on April 14 the Liberal leader said, “We will have to raise taxes”.
Does the government agree with the Liberal leader when he says, “We will have to raise taxes”, and should Canadians take him at his word?
[Table of Contents]
Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, CPC):
Words, Mr. Speaker. As an academic, a journalist and author, the Liberal leader has built his entire career on words. Surely he cannot tell us that his words mean nothing. If his words mean nothing, then he means nothing.
His words were, “We will have to raise taxes”. Which taxes would he raise, how much would he raise them and who would have to pay? I invite the leader of the Liberal Party to return to his seat and answer that question right after question period.
I can't wait to see him trying to collect EI!
I think it's time that the Liberals just preface every question with "When the CONservatives raised income taxes in 2006 and then taxed retirees Income Trust funds..."
If its all about repeating something enough to make it a fact, time to repeat some facts to give the turkeys a taste of their own gravy.
I could be wrong here - but didn't Ignatieff say any honest politician would have raising taxes as an option?
That's not saying he would - he's indicating that an "honest" politician may have to use that option to pay down the debt. Hey, Mulroney did it with the GST.
I could be wrong here - but didn't Ignatieff say any honest politician would have raising taxes as an option?
That's not saying he would - he's indicating that an "honest" politician may have to use that option to pay down the debt. Hey, Mulroney did it with the GST.
Sandi
Speaking of honesty, Pierre also said in another part of his answer, that the Conservatives "would lower taxes".
Post a Comment